<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Americans vastly underestimate the degree of wealth inequality in America, and we believe that the distribution should be far more equitable than it actually is, according to a new study.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Or, as the study's authors put it: "All demographic groups -- even those not usually associated with wealth redistribution such as Republicans and the wealthy -- desired a more equal distribution of wealth than the status quo."</span>

The report (pdf) "Building a Better America -- One Wealth Quintile At A Time" by Dan Ariely of Duke University and Michael I. Norton of Harvard Business School (hat tip to Paul Kedrosky), shows that across ideological, economic and gender groups, Americans thought the richest 20 percent of our society controlled about 59 percent of the wealth, while the real number was closer to 84 percent.

More interesting than that, the report says, is that the respondents (a randomly selected 5,522-person sample, reflecting the country's ideological, economic and gender demographics, surveyed in December 2005) believed the top 20 percent should own only 32 percent of the wealth. Respondents with incomes over $100,000 per year had similar answers to those making less then $50,000. (The report has helpful, multi-colored charts.)

The respondents were presented with unlabeled pie charts representing the wealth distributions of the U.S., where the richest 20 percent controlled about 84 percent of wealth, and Sweden, where the top 20 percent only controlled 36 percent of wealth. Without knowing which country they were picking, 92 percent of respondents said they'd rather live in a country with Sweden's wealth distribution.

As the new Forbes billionaires list, released Wednesday, testifies, the richest Americans are getting richer, even as the country as a whole gets poorer. After 2005 income inequality continued to balloon.

I have been trying to explain the plight of the working poor to the clan on these forums for years but they either don't have any contact with these folks or choose to turn a deaf ear.

Mainly I get from them how charitable conservative Republican millionires are.
It's like debating a brick wall.

LWW

09-23-2010, 05:46 PM

Perhaps you should move to Sweden?

Or, better yet, perhaps you might take the time to consider that in America the average citizen is better off than the average Swede ... the poor Americans are better off than the poor Swedes ... and the rich Americans are better off than the rich Swedes.

I disagree. At least a brick wall stands for something. They just roll over for the sake of the party.

Steve

Qtec

09-23-2010, 07:38 PM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Or, better yet, perhaps you might take the time to consider that in America the average citizen is better off than the average Swede ... the poor Americans are better off than the poor Swedes ... and the rich Americans are better off than the rich Swedes.

LWW </div></div>

What rubbish.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A new report by the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) details the persistent effect of massive social inequality on the world's children. The report—the first in a series of “Report Cards” issued by UNICEF—examines child poverty in the world's richest nations.

The countries considered in the report consist of the 29 members of the Organization for Economic Development (OECD). The report states that 47 million children in these countries, or one out of every six, live below the national poverty line, defined as half the average national income. For most of the report, this measure of “relative” poverty is used rather than “absolute” poverty, which is defined as the inability to purchase a certain quantity of goods deemed universally necessary for an “acceptable” life. The report primarily examines inequality and poverty as it impacts children in the supposedly most prosperous countries.

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Significantly, the report found that the United States has one of the highest rates of relative child poverty of all OECD members. In the US, 22.4 percent of children live in poverty, a number second only to Mexico, with 26.2 percent.</span> Countries with high rates also include: Italy (20.5 percent), the United Kingdom (19.8 percent) and Turkey (19.7 percent). Countries with slightly lower poverty rates include: Canada (15.5 percent), Australia (12.6 percent), Germany (10.7 percent) and Hungary (10.3 percent). The lowest levels of child poverty are to be found in countries with relatively high social expenditures, including: France (7.9 percent), Finland (4.4 percent) <span style='font-size: 14pt'>and Sweden (2.6 percent).</span>
</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have been trying to explain the plight of the working poor to the clan on these forums for years but they either don't have any contact with these folks or choose to turn a deaf ear.

Mainly I get from them how charitable conservative Republican millionires are.
It's like debating a brick wall. </div></div>

They've been thorouoghly hypnotized by the Palinban from Beckistan, and their blinded by all that lip gloss. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif